This article is a response to Christian Köhlert's Cassandra Hypothesis. If you aren't already familiar with that, I'd recommend reading it first.
In the original paper, the author presents a fairly detailed hypothesis regarding the ongoing global transformation in the context of an upcoming pole shift. They assert that their interpretation of current events transcends popular suspicions surrounding the so-called 'Great Reset' and 'Q' narratives — both of which the author suggests are "limited hangouts or psyops to lead people off the tracks." Indeed, Köhlert puts the Cassandra Hypothesis forward for the attention of "individuals who understand that something more profound is happening behind the curtain of reality, but can't quite put their finger on it."
Köhlert explains that he wrote the Cassandra Hypothesis after years of "strolling through the deeper tunnels — the conceptual constructs which you can't ignore once you leave the artificial surface of the mainstream fairy tale and go down into the rabbit hole of alternative media." I absolutely relate to this — I have been interested in science, space, and history since I was a young child. I have read countless books and papers and watched hundreds of documentaries and videos. Like Köhlert, over the years, I began to see recurring patterns and realize that many seemingly unrelated strands were actually leading to the same incredible, and very unsettling, conclusion.
On the fundamentals, over two decades of in-depth research have led me to absolutely agree with Köhlert. However, I feel that he missed several important points and the argument needs a more thorough explanation and more supporting evidence. In this series of posts, I will attempt to address these shortcomings.
So, before you read on, I would urge you to keep an open mind and not let fear or normalcy bias cloud your judgment and reasoning.
Cataclysmic cycles
In the Cassandra Hypothesis, Köhlert asserts that the System (aka the Powers that Be) is aware that the Earth goes through cataclysmic cycles on a regular, clockwork-like, basis. He suggests that "most analysts" familiar with these cycles believe the cataclysm to be a recurring pole shift, and that the System discovered conclusive evidence of this and the fact we are due for another imminently, sometime in the 1980s.
However, although I strongly believe there is a recurring global catastrophe, and a pole shift is a part of that — it is just a component of a much bigger disaster. I also have reason to believe that the System discovered conclusive evidence of this earlier than the 1980s. Indeed, I believe the United States government, and possibly those of the other Five Eyes countries (United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand), and maybe the Soviet Union strongly suspected an approaching cataclysm as early as the 1950s — and that by the 1970s, the System knew the general score.
In the Cassandra Hypothesis, the author suggests that conclusive evidence for the cyclical pole shift came from ice cores, records from ancient civilizations, and data from IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite — the first space telescope to perform a survey of the entire night sky at infrared wavelengths, launched in 1983). I absolutely concur that these did indeed provide evidence of the cyclical catastrophe, but I believe that the United States military had already collected strong evidence of a cyclical pole shift by the early 1950s, thanks to Project Nanook.
Project Nanook
Project Nanook was the first operational mission assigned to the newly formed Strategic Air Command (created on March 21, 1946). It employed long-range reconnaissance aircraft (converted B-29 bombers) of the 46th/72nd Reconnaissance Squadron to map the Arctic — something necessary to enable SAC bombers to safely operate in those remote skies. However, the mission also found three magnetic north poles and made discoveries that led Pentagon scientists to predict a global cataclysm.
The detailed history of the 46th/72nd Reconnaissance Squadron's participation in Project Nanook, and the unsettling discoveries made regarding the Earth's history and future, are detailed in World in Peril; The Story Behind the Discovery of Imminent Global Change, by Ken White. The book was written based on first-hand accounts and documents left by the author's father, Major Maynard E. White — the unit commander of the operation.
Charles Hapgood
Another indication that the US government knew about the upcoming pole shift as early as the 1950s lies in the work of Charles Hutchins Hapgood — best known as the author of The Earth's Shifting Crust (1958), which contained a foreword penned by Albert Einstein. In this book, Hapgood introduced the idea of Earth crust displacement — positing that the planet's axis had dramatically shifted numerous times. Unsurprisingly, the ideas in the book were shunned by most mainstream scientists at the time, and are still dismissed by many to this day. The same applies to theories put forth in Hapgood's subsequent books including Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings (1966) and The Path of the Pole (1970). Indeed, many of Hapgood's detractors labeled his work 'pseudoarchaeology' (Wikipedia still does).
However, there is a growing consensus among researchers, that Hapgood's work was a deliberate attempt to discredit the entire pole shift idea. This emanates from the fact that many of his assertions are seemingly physically impossible, or at least not backed by hard evidence. This, coupled with the possibility that he was either directly or indirectly on the payroll of the CIA, suggests his books were indeed a deliberate attempt to discredit the entire field.
This makes sense when you consider that, until the very early 20th century, Catastrophism — i.e., the belief that although slow forces, like erosion, do fine-tune the Earth's surface, many of the major features we see, like mountain ranges and canyons, were actually formed much more rapidly during periods of intense cataclysmic changes — was mainstream. Well-known proponents of this idea were Georges Cuvier, Abraham Werner, and the British catastrophists. Needless to say, this line of thinking, though supported by much physical evidence, was far too close to Biblical and other religious lore than scientists of the day found comfortable. Hence, by World War 1 catastrophism had largely been supplanted in the educational institutions of the West by a complete focus on uniformitarianism. This fully embraced the slow, gradual crawl of anything and everything in nature, from Darwinian evolution to the infinitely slow sculpting of landscapes by eons of water and wind erosion. To question any of it became akin to heresy.
So, considering that, in the 1950s, catastrophism had only relatively recently been suppressed, it is logical that the System would fear its revival — something that would risk the great secret being blown wide open. But, even if Hapgood's deliberately disprovable assertions caused most of the serious scientific community to shun the subject of pole shift for a few decades, it did at least plant the seed of the idea into the minds of many who would later take a more in-depth and rational look. Indeed, over the last decade or so, scientists around the world have been taking a fresh look at catastrophism and starting to integrate elements of it back into the big picture. However, as I will explain, I suspect the subterfuge worked for long enough.
The Apollo missions, glass beads & JFK
Have you ever wondered why the United States was willing to expend such resources on getting to the Moon in the 1960s but hasn't sent a manned mission back there since 1972? Have you ever considered why the Apollo missions, which were to the Moon, were named after an ancient Greek and Roman god of the Sun? Also consider it was President John F. Kennedy who, on 25 May 1961, announced the goal of sending US astronauts to the Moon before the end of the 1960s — the same president who was assassinated on 22 November 1963, in what has become one of the most controversial deaths ever.
Could it be that the Apollo project was launched, as a matter of extreme urgency, to find conclusive confirmation of a cyclical cataclysm linked to the Sun? There is compelling evidence that the primary mission of the Apollo landings was to collect tiny glass spheres (microspherules) from the surface of the Moon and bring them back to Earth for study — something that would have been impossible with robotic technology at the time.
Why tiny glass spheres you ask? Because, around 12,000 years ago, the Sun blasted both the Earth and the Moon, leaving behind a layer of microspherules — remains of a dust shell that had coalesced around the fiery orb, turning it into something akin to a pressure cooker, before it went micronova (more on that later). Of course, these tiny glass beads also cover the Earth itself, on one side at least, but the forces of wind, rain, and life have washed them away, buried them, and mixed them, so they are hard to find. They can also be confused with similar spheres made by other natural forces. However, on the lifeless, still, surface of the Moon, the glass beads from the Sun's last micronova are still there, on the surface, in vast quantities. This is what the astronauts were scooping up and bringing home. In fact, there are even recordings of NASA astronauts talking about the glass beads as they collected them.
Although, as we've already seen, the System probably had a fair idea about the rough nature of the cyclical disaster in the early 1950s, there would, of course, have been an urgent requirement to gather conclusive proof. Because, as we'll see later, the machine that swung into action upon confirmation of the cyclical cataclysm was vast, and would override every other consideration for the remainder of the age.
So, now we know why the Apollo missions were so-named, what they were for, and why there was such urgency. It's also fairly easy to deduce why the interest in going back to the Moon disappeared. Because, despite the vast mineral deposits on Earth's satellite, and despite the potential of Moon bases serving as more efficient launchpads for deeper space missions, there was simply no point. The System realized that any facility built on the Moon would be even more vulnerable to the solar and cosmic elements of the upcoming cataclysm, and even if such facilities could survive the immediate disaster, they would end up cut off from Earth, and thus unsustainable. I believe they also reasoned that it was better to direct money and resources to other preparations.
And, as for President Kennedy, he knew too much. His secret relationship with Marilyn Monroe, and the Hollywood circles that entailed him mixing in, meant he was too much of a liability. The dangers were severalfold. First, he might have confided in her, second, he made himself vulnerable to blackmail, and third, his illicit love life was, quite naturally, like a magnet for journalists and sleuths. There was every chance that JFK's personal life would have led to the compromising of the big secret. So, he had to go.
The Adam & Eve Story
In 1965, a mysterious author by the name of Chan Thomas published a book entitled The Adam and Eve Story: The History of Cataclysms. It tells the dramatic story of a global catastrophe that erases our civilization from the face of the Earth, leaving just a handful of survivors. While the book was largely forgotten for decades, it has recently been the source of much discussion after being found in the CIA's online reference. While the style of the book is much more dramatic than Hapgood's The Earth's Shifting Crust, it most definitely includes a major crust and pole shift as significant components.
Interestingly, in a later edition of the book, Thomas details a precise mechanism that could 'unlock' the Earth's crust at the low-velocity zone, allowing for a rapid and substantial slippage of the entire crust. This possibly solves the problem that both Hapgood and Einstein had been battling with — that there wasn't normally enough of an imbalance, in terms of mass, to drive a major global slippage. More importantly, the mechanism proposed by Thomas ties in perfectly to another aspect of the cyclical cataclysm — something we will explain later.
Preparations
So, again, I posit that the Powers that Be (TPTB) attained confirmation that Earth suffered cyclical cataclysms as early as 1969 when the first Apollo lander mission brought back glass beads from the Moon. From that point on, a vast effort to prepare for the coming disaster was initiated. And, I absolutely agree with the Cassandra Hypothesis, in that the System decided to keep it all secret because of the implications if the public found out.
For more than five decades now, vast resources have been channeled into building DUMBs (Deep Underground Military Bunkers), researching and developing new technologies, planning various smokescreens and false narratives, and finally, stockpiling equipment and supplies.
I agree with the assertion in the Cassandra Hypothesis, that the "System's pragmatic procedure does not care for individual suffering when humanity as a whole is at risk," and that it "focuses on the 'best' outcome to secure the advancements of modern society and the survival of the human species in general."
It is extremely important to realize that, as pointed out in the Cassandra Hypothesis, only a tiny cadre of an elite caste have ever been aware of the big picture and overall plans — and that "most individuals and groups involved in the grand design had other motivations" — primarily wealth and power.
Going underground
As the System engaged in the Cold War nuclear arms race, vast sums were poured into the construction of increasingly labyrinthine underground shelters. While some of these, like NORAD's Cheyenne Mountain Complex in Colorado, or the vast bunker underneath The Greenbrier resort in West Virginia have become part of popular culture, the majority of such facilities undoubtedly remain top secret. Indeed, over the past twenty years or so, many maps have appeared on the internet showing suspected locations of dozens of underground cities, and even a transcontinental underground high-speed railway connecting them, dotting the United States.
Of course, considering the top-secret nature of any such projects, there's no way of verifying such maps. But, it is interesting to note that, along with maps and rumors, there have also been thousands of reports of strange rumbles and shaking from across the US and other countries over recent years — cases where both natural seismic activity and conventional military activity have been ruled out. Could these be down to large-scale blasting at underground construction sites? I suspect that some reports can indeed be attributed to subterranean construction (although some of the reports are more likely due to the behavior of our magnetosphere — more on that later).
Supporting the idea that the System is heavily engaged in underground goings on, was DARPA's Subterranean Challenge. Yep, between September 2018 and September 2021, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency — a research agency of the United States Department of Defense, based in Arlington County, Virginia — ran a very interesting competition. The stated goal was to seek "novel approaches to rapidly map, navigate, and search underground environments during time-sensitive combat operations or disaster response scenarios." Specifically, the challenge covered tunnel systems, urban underground, and cave networks. It was open to teams from around the world and offered millions of dollars in prize money.
War as a smokescreen
As previously mentioned, the public rationale for spending incredible amounts of public money on DUMBs was the Cold War nuclear threat. And, to most people at the time, this seemed perfectly plausible. However, the construction didn't end with the thawing of the Cold War in 1991. In fact, despite many countries massively slashing defense spending — at least on the surface — construction of underground facilities continued. Illustrating this, around 2010, reports started surfacing of the Russians building hundreds of new nuclear bunkers in Moscow and other cities. At the same time, the bunker-obsessed Swiss were also continuing to invest in deep underground shelters. No doubt, the same was going on in other developed countries too.
Saddam — a bogeyman on a retainer
But, as usual, the biggest red flags come from the United States and the United Kingdom. Yes, the Cold War officially ended in 1991, but the trans-Atlantic duo had already assured continuity of war. Does anyone remember the 1991 Gulf War? Yep, in an altogether odd turn of events, the US and the UK headed a military coalition of 39 countries (though the vast majority of forces were American, British, French, and Saudi — the rest were merely token) to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein's occupation.
I say odd not because I'm a fan of Saddam, who was undoubtedly a brutal dictator, but because just a few years previously, Iraq had been a friend of the West. Furthermore, when it comes to brutality and human rights, the Kuwaiti regime was as bad, if not worse, than the Iraqi. And, let's not forget, Saudi Arabia, a key member of the coalition and jumping-off point for Operation Desert Storm, was undoubtedly worse than both (and still is).
Of course, at the time, the popular Western assumption was that the war against Iraq was about oil. But, that argument really doesn't add up. The reason Iraq invaded Kuwait was likely about the Iraqis not paying debts they owed to the Kuwaitis, and the Kuwaitis themselves drilling diagonally under the border into Iraqi oil fields. But, there was no reason for the Iraqi takeover of Kuwait to significantly affect the global oil markets or supply. Kuwait simply wasn't a big enough player, and keeping friendly with Iraq would have made far more sense, in the big picture, for the West — if the war was really about oil that is.
I suspect that the sudden hostility towards Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a component of a deliberate plan to ensure continuous war, and hence a continued justification for vast military and intelligence spending. Although the principal clue to this is the initial timing of the sudden change in stance towards Iraq — coming just as the Cold War was ending (notably driven largely by popular European public pressure, not political initiative) — there are also other giveaways. One of these is the nature of the military campaign itself.
Operation Desert Shield, the military build-up in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf began in August 1990 and ran until January 1991. It was very impressive and made for great television. I remember being in San Diego, for Christmas 1990, and the patriotism and pride in the military were evident everywhere. On 17 January 1991, Operation Desert Storm began, and by 28 February Kuwait had been liberated. The Coalition forces absolutely massacred Iraq's military. In all, according to Wikipedia, the Coalition lost under 300 troops to enemy action, while Iraq lost up to 50,000 killed, up to 75,000 wounded, and up to 175,000 captured. Material losses were similarly one-sided; with the Coalition losing a few dozen tanks and armored vehicles, and around 75 aircraft, but the Iraqis losing over 5,000 tanks and armored vehicles, over 2,000 artillery pieces, and around 110 aircraft destroyed — while 137 aircraft fled to arch-enemy Iran to escape destruction. The small Iraqi navy was also annihilated.
Operation Desert Storm saw Coalition forces enter and capture large swathes of Iraqi territory, but, suspiciously, after 100 hours, ground forces halted. After that, combat over Iraq itself was confined to the air. At the time, this was portrayed as a result of the Coalition's mission goal of merely liberating Kuwait. But, considering how much the West had vilified Saddam, how ferocious the combat had already been, and how decimated Iraq's forces were, it seems obvious Coalition forces could easily have driven straight to Baghdad and removed the regime. But, they didn't. More accurately, the US backed down, leaving Saddam severely weakened, but in power.
Then, over the next decade, a shrinking coalition, still predominantly consisting of US and UK forces, maintained 'no-fly' zones over both southern and northern Iraq. Over the years, several Iraqi Air Force aircraft that strayed into these zones were shot down, while thousands of airstrikes and cruise missile attacks were conducted against military targets on the ground. Ostensibly, these were often to protect persecuted minorities like the Kurds, but, stepping back and looking at the big picture, they maintained a decade-long low-intensity war. It was as if Saddam was allowed to stay in power, just to give the US and certain allies, an excuse to keep up military spending and keep a 'rogue nation' on retainer.
By the turn of the century, the public in both the US and the UK was starting to get fed up with the Iraq situation. Other countries that had been contributing minor forces had all but pulled out, and it was becoming increasingly difficult to justify the spending and risk — especially since Saddam's regime, honed by a decade of war, was getting smarter and stronger again. The System needed another war to act as a smokescreen for their vast preparations. And, right on cue, they launched it.
Cue the War on Terror
On September 11, 2001, two hijacked airliners slammed into World Trade Center towers 1 and 2 in New York City, while another hit the Pentagon in Washington DC, and a fourth crashed in rural Pennsylvania after passengers, made aware of their potential fate, fought to regain control of the plane. In all, over 3,000 innocent civilians were killed, and many more were injured and traumatized. It was undoubtedly one of the most horrific and barbaric terrorist acts in history and was made all the more gut-wrenching by the fact that it was broadcast live on television. In fact, I clearly remember watching a news broadcast live as the second airliner hit the World Trade Center. The images of people jumping and the towers collapsing will remain etched into my mind until I die.
Now, I have absolutely no doubt that airliners were hijacked by terrorists and that it was an immense tragedy. I also believe that the vast majority of politicians and those in the military who participated in subsequent events were doing so in good faith, believing that the United States had been attacked by nefarious foreign forces. But, from the day of the attacks, there were suspicions that something more nefarious was going on. In the years since the 911 attacks, there have been volumes written by researchers alleging various conspiracies — often offering very compelling evidence to back them up. But, that is a rabbit hole I'm going to avoid here for the sake of length. I'll merely point out some overarching observations of the events.
Firstly, it was always very unlikely that individuals who had only very basic experience in flying very light aircraft could have successfully piloted large commercial jets into their targets as accurately as they did. Secondly, the fact that all four groups of hijackers managed to get through airport security undetected was 'convenient.' Thirdly, the fact that, on the same day as the attack, the US military was conducting exercises involving hijacked planes being crashed into buildings, thus causing understandable confusion and delays in its response, is extremely suspicious. Fourthly, the way both WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed in what has widely been described as a 'controlled demolition' manner, reeks of nefarious goings on. But, the biggest red flag of all is how the attacks were immediately used to justify new military campaigns in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Again, I won't go into the details of these campaigns, as most readers will be old enough to remember them vividly. But, it is highly suspicious that, after a decade of keeping Saddam Hussein simmering on the stove, the System came up with a convenient excuse to finally finish the job, invade Iraq, and get rid of Saddam, while simultaneously opening up a new open-ended war in Afghanistan. And, let's not forget, all of this would be against a background of media-fanned fear and paranoia, a constant erosion of fundamental civil rights — and just enough ongoing terrorist attacks to keep the public compliant.
Of course, there was a seemingly plausible reason for invading Afghanistan — to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and remove the Taliban regime that was sheltering him and his Al Qaeda terror group. But, when it comes to Iraq, things weren't as easy to explain. So, the US and UK cooked up the whole 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' psyop. We now know that this was a fabrication and that even if Saddam had, at one point, had some chemical weapons, by 2001 they posed no significant threat. The fact is that, before the dust had even settled in New York, the US and UK had decided to invade Iraq.
Furthermore, although the Afghan campaign and occupation did seem at least conceivably justifiable to begin with, even attracting participants from countries as non-warlike as Iceland (sent special response units as part of the stabilization force), the way the country was abandoned after two decades of massive investment — with desperate civilians literally clinging to the undercarriage of departing C-17s, and troops abandoning billions of dollars worth of relatively new — gave the game away.
While most observers understandably assume both Iraq, from 1991 to 2011 and Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, were conflicts that 'trapped' the US and its allies in quagmires, I strongly believe they were, at the highest level, engineered to be convenient open-ended smokescreens. The fact that they were inherently messy due to the complex historical, religious, ethnic, and political factors, suited the System's needs perfectly. They provided the chance to create any narratives desired, and their inherent complexities sowed valuable confusion — the perfect smokescreens.
Winter on Fire and War in Europe
From an American and European point-of-view, far away wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan are one thing. But, a war in Europe, is quite another. Despite Europe being the most militarized continent on Earth since 1945, there has been no major conventional conflict on its land since the end of World War 2. Yes, there have been messy civil wars, like in Greece and later the former Yugoslavia, and even minor conflicts between countries like Greece and Turkey over Cyprus, but large-scale conventional conflict, with main battle tanks, jet fighters, artillery, and trenches, has been absent. The reason? Western Europe had been so devastated by the Second World War, and its population so traumatized, that the concept of fighting with neighbors became unthinkable. Yes, you had the ongoing Cold War, but as I've already hinted, that was likely deliberate theater — a vast distraction that would never have been allowed to go 'hot.'
And, as the Cold War faded into memory, the Western European assumption of the impossibility of real war at home spread east, across Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, and the Baltic states. Indeed, with the expansion of the European Union and the rise of the globalized internet age, by the early 2010s, the idea of war in Europe seemed absurd to most Europeans. Then, in November 2013, something happened in the east, just beyond the border of the EU, in Ukraine. Pro-European protests, popularly known as Euromaiden, or the Maiden Uprising, erupted in Kyiv, centered on Maiden Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square) in the capital, Kyiv.
After a tense few months, which saw dramatic scenes of fearless civilians battling armed riot police and internal troops in freezing conditions, the Russian-leaning government of President Viktor Yanukovych had been toppled and replaced by a pro-Western administration. It was all very inspiring, from a western perspective. Indeed, Netflix aired a very moving documentary about it, Winter on Fire. And, there is no doubt, the Ukrainian people involved showed immense courage, and were fighting for what they believed — I do not doubt this for a moment. I do, however, suspect that Ukraine was being manipulated by the System, to provide a mechanism to ratchet up the fear and smokescreen at a later date.
You see, immediately following Euromaiden, 'unidentified' green-clad troops with Russian accents seized Crimea — part of Ukraine. As anyone with a brain knew at the time, these forces without identifiable insignia, were regular Russian armed forces. Despite some brave acts of non-violent defiance, there was no armed resistance from Ukrainian forces at the time. This made sense since they had suffered from years of neglect and underfunding, and at the time, they didn't expect support from the West. This Russian move was perfectly predictable given events in Kyiv — considering the vital strategic importance of the Russian naval base at Sevastopol and the Kremlin's paranoia about Ukraine falling under Western influence. Also predictable was the way it acted as a touch paper for the ensuing conflict in Donbas — the majority Russian-speaking region in Ukraine's east.
Again, just like Iraq and Afghanistan, the complicated patchwork of political, ethnic, and religious identities in eastern Ukraine, underpinned by shockingly brutal history, ensured it was fertile ground for an ongoing, irreconcilable conflict — a conflict that could easily be kept simmering, and dialed up or down on demand by the System. Of course, this isn't to say that those involved on the ground were in any way privy to this manipulation — in fact, quite the opposite. It is the deep-seated emotion and raw nerves involved that make it the kind of conflict so suitable to the System's ultimate aims.
As we all know, Russian President Vladimir Putin shifted the Ukraine conflict up a gear when he launched his 'Special Military Operation' on 24 February 2022. Although it was sold to the Russian public as a minor policing operation that would 'rid the Ukraine of Nazis' and stabilize the region in a matter of days, it actually ignited the first major conventional war in Europe since 1945. The previously pacifist European countries, unsurprisingly led by the United States and the United Kingdom, rallied to the aid of Ukraine — supplying weapons, ammunition, funding, and other aid, including military intelligence, in steadily increasing quantities. This enabled the Ukrainians to foil the initial Russian attempt to capture Kyiv and force them back, until a relatively stable front formed in the east of the country. Suspiciously, the western mainstream media, unanimously came out 'all guns blazing' to support Ukraine and demand governments provide even more assistance.
Now, I will again stress, I am not commenting on the rights or wrongs of the war here. There is no doubt that Russia has been the aggressor, and committed abhorrent atrocities against civilians during the course of the war. There is no doubt that innocent Ukrainian civilians and soldiers alike are victims. What I am saying is that, as the author of the Cassandra Hypothesis puts it "Everything we see on the international stage concerning a geostrategic altercation is mere theatre for the masses…"
Perhaps most ominously, as always, is the timing. Why exactly did the Biden administration decide to cut and run from Afghanistan in August 2021? In the narrow sense of that campaign and US politics, it appeared to do nothing but hurt everyone involved (except the Taliban, of course). Why after so long and so much expense with the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent decade of enforcing no-fly zones, did the US and UK decide to invade Iraq fully in 2003, creating a war that would give Vietnam a run for its money? And, why just as those operations were abandoned, was the simmering Ukraine conflict dialed up to 11?
I think there is a very logical reason for the timing of all of this. But, more on that shortly. First, let's take a look at something else that happened recently.
A convenient pandemic
Almost exactly two years before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, an 'apocalyptic' pandemic burst onto the world stage, leading to unprecedented lockdowns, mass vaccination with unproven and untested products, and a significant collapse of global supply chains. I say 'apocalyptic' because it, very clearly, wasn't. The reactions to the pandemic were what made it seem apocalyptic, not the actual virus. Now, let me make this very clear, I am not denying that there was a pandemic or a COVID-19 virus. What I am saying is that, just like 911 and recent wars, something doesn't feel right about the whole affair. Well, actually, many things don't feel right about it.
All was not as it seemed
In the interests of space, I won't go into all of the suspicious aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic. But, I will just outline some of the major red flags that suggest it was an orchestrated operation, and part of something much bigger.
Firstly, to most of the population, COVID-19 burst onto the scene with dramatic effect in Wuhan, China, in November 2019. Really, I mean dramatic. Remember the concrete and metal barriers across highways, the people locked in their apartments from the outside, and the huge temporary hospitals quickly built (with negative pressure isolation rooms)? All that and plenty more for what we now refer to as the 'original Wuhan strain' which we know had an absolutely minuscule fatality rate. It had more than a touch of theater to it for sure. Again, I'm not saying that the population of Wuhan was in on it, but it definitely seems high-up forces were making a 'mountain out of a molehill.'
Secondly, it is now widely suspected that the original virus was circulating as far away from China as Italy, and possibly elsewhere in Europe, months before it was officially acknowledged — perhaps as early as late summer 2019. Supporting this is the fact that, in the final months of 2019, there was a significant rise in the number of pneumonia cases across Europe. This gives rise to the question; if it hadn't been for the Wuhan 'public launch' would we have actually had a 'pandemic emergency' or would it have just passed as a particularly bad autumn and winter for viral pneumonia?
Thirdly, the behavior of other countries, particularly the Five Eyes countries (USA, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand), throughout the crisis was very suspicious. Initially, despite the terrifying scenes from Wuhan, the authorities in these countries downplayed the threat and kept everything open — even international flights and cruises. Then, all of a sudden, the attitude of the governments changed overnight. The UK entered its first national lockdown in March 2020, while the insanity that followed, especially in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and certain US states, but also across Europe, is well documented. The point is, it seems like someone, at the very top, 'The System' if you will, wanted to ensure the virus had spread everywhere, before implementing lockdowns and fear-inducing restrictions.
Fourthly, the vaccines. Everything about the vaccine program stunk from day one. Even if we forget things like the highly suspiciously timed Netflix documentary Pandemic: How to Prevent an Outbreak (which focused on vilifying anyone distrustful of vaccines and cast vaccine researchers as humanity's saviors), released in mid-January 2020, there are other major red flags. One is how quickly the vaccine manufacturers came up with their products — obviously, this was simply spun as those previously mentioned 'saviors' performing their miracles. Another is how despite the fact everyone knew the vaccines were developed so quickly they couldn't possibly have been adequately tested (on pregnant women, for example), no one was permitted to question this — not even some of the most qualified industry experts, like Dr. Robert Malone and Geert Vanden Bossche (more on those two in a moment). And, isn't it funny how the authorities were hell-bent on vaccinating like mad until about 80% — 90% of the population had been vaccinated and boosted — even when it was becoming clear the vaccines didn't prevent infection or illness — but then suddenly dropped the pressure, and in many cases abruptly halted the programs (the UK and Denmark, for example). It's like they reached a preset target.
Fifthly, back to the likes of Dr. Malone and Vanden Bossche. There are many scientists and doctors who voiced concerns over the vaccination program, but I will focus on these two because they are perhaps the best examples of how the mainstream media conducted deliberate character assassinations and censorship. Malone is an American physician and biochemist who was instrumental in developing the very mRNA technology that the most popular COVID-19 vaccines relied on, while Vanden Bossche is a Belgian virology expert with broad experience in vaccine research and development. Neither are what anyone could label 'anti-vaxxers', but both have continuously spoken out against the vaccine programs — doing their best to explain the complexities and dangers of vaccinating in the midst of a raging pandemic, and using unsafe mRNA tech.
Again, there isn't space here to go into detail about their arguments, but the point is that they were completely eviscerated by an abhorrent ignorant mainstream media and equally simple-minded politicians. One look at the Wikipedia pages for either Malone or Vanden Bossche shows just how efficiently the 'fact checkers' and mainstream media have tarred them. Luckily, both have found the strength to battle through and are now being vindicated by real-world events.
Whilst, during the pandemic, no one straying from the approved System narrative was allowed a say on mainstream media, increasingly the truth is breaking through. From independent media to politicians (like Senators Babet and Rennick in Australia, and Andrew Bridgen MP in the UK), people are now asking serious questions about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, and their apparent link to an explosion in 'excess deaths.' Heck, even personalities like Russell Brand have now taken to holding mainstream journalists to account.
Anyway, again, the point here is that from the start of the vaccination campaign, questions and debates were absolutely not tolerated in most countries. Only after 80%-90% of the population was vaccinated and boosted, did The System start to relent. However, such was the level of censorship and mind control exerted over the course of the campaign, that even now, much of the mainstream clings to the illusion that the vaccines were 'safe and effective' and that it was all about 'following the science'. And, let's not forget, this was all for a virus with a true fatality rate of a fraction of a percent. While this won't provide comfort for those who lost loved ones to COVID, it has to be put in context to the damage done while supposedly trying to control the outbreak and the specter of what the vaccinations have done to the future.
Supply chain smoke and mirrors
Of course, the same approach was applied to anyone who questioned the wisdom of the lockdowns. With hindsight, there is no question that the economic and health (especially mental) damage done by the lockdowns vastly outweigh anything the virus could have done. But, again, anyone who dared to question or oppose the measures was vilified, condemned, belittled, and in some cases even arrested. And, again, we saw the Five Eyes countries show the world how to implement totalitarian regimes overnight, while still having the audacity to claim to be 'free' and 'liberal.' Only China itself, which pursued its unique 'Zero COVID' strategy until late 2022 displayed more contempt for its own people.
Needless to say, this was a high-risk route for democracies. Had the heinous propaganda campaigns not led to such effective self-censorship (remember the 'Covidiot' and 'granny killer' slurs), western governments could easily have felt the full force of widespread public anger and violence on the streets. Of course, there was one more very effective element that prevented a public backlash — bribery. Remember all the various furlough and COVID payment schemes? All totally unaffordable and unsustainable — and things that have collectively led to crippling inflation and the cost of living crisis. But, more on that in a moment.
You see, the sum result of all of these pandemic measures wasn't just getting most people injected with a highly suspicious experimental 'vaccine', but also throwing the world's economy and supply chains into chaos. With factories shutting down due to a lack of workers or supplies, shipping, trucking, and air cargo routes suspended or bottlenecked, and the intricate system of globalized just-in-time distribution systems falling apart, no one knew what was going on. The crisis gave a catch-all excuse for shortages and price rises for everything from computers and smartphones to toilet paper and beer. And, everyone from Joe Public to business analysts swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
Now, think back to the DUMBs (deep underground military bases) mentioned in Part 1 of this article. Christian Köhlert, author of the Cassandra Hypothesis, comments:
"Getting physical resources like building materials, semiconductors, and microchips in large amounts underground is much more tricky. You can't fill the bunker over time because you need the latest technological generation, but moving such an enormous part in a short time frame is hard to hide on the global market. That is the challenge.
Therefore, you need a crisis as a deception to hide certain anomalies that would be too apparent if implemented in a "normal" situation. I guess you anticipate what I like to convey here. Still, that does not mean that the 2020 crisis was only about covering up the secret outflow of certain assets into DUMBs. Instead, the pandemic was used as a Swiss knife for blurring out various clandestine moves to prepare for the inevitable."
There you have it. The reason for the smoke and mirrors with the supply chains. It really is that simple. And, staying with the global economy, is the reason governments felt free to "spend like there's no tomorrow," because they know there isn't one?
So, now, we've got a series of wars that make little sense but seem to be being manipulated, turned up and down on demand, to justify massive military and intelligence spending. We've got excuses to constantly ratchet up fear and justify increasingly draconian policies. And, we've got a catch-all excuse to provide cover for the mass diversion of supplies and equipment to a huge network of DUMBs.
Avoiding Mad Max
This leaves us with a pretty big outstanding question. What was the point of the pandemic and vaccines? Was it just to give an excuse for the supply chain smokescreen? Well, clearly not. That couldn't have been done solely with fear of a pandemic and lockdowns — no need for vaccines.
In the Cassandra Hypothesis, Köhlert proposes that the primary purpose of the System's agenda is to "provide a diversion from the final movement of physical and human resources. Secondly, it helps to cull the herd."
He goes on to explain:
"The question of why the System would attempt to reduce the population before an event that would create even more damage to humanity is widely misunderstood and emotionally charged. I can't blame someone incapable of thinking this way. Still, someone or something can look at the situation like a sheep farmer managing a herd through harsh environmental conditions.
Please let me use an analogy to take the emotional charge out of the situation: By culling the herd, you allow having more resources for the sheep that need to remain at the surface. Also, when you want to move the chosen ones from the underground back upstairs to rebuild the farm, you don't want too many hungry and desperate survivors waiting for them.
Those in despair might compromise your elaborated plans for a controlled rebuild by forcefully demanding too much of the stored-in provender. You might have some extra food to compensate for several extra mouths to feed. Still, too many survivors in a total meltdown of the global economy and infrastructure might turn your designated designer society into a Mad Max knock-off. A controlled culling might improve the odds here, and I am sure they conducted simulations to prove that."
I absolutely agree with the core idea here; that of culling the herd. To me, it makes logical sense. And, I think it explains the entire vaccination issue. As a side note, it seems obvious that it is a 'slow burn' event because if you want to murder everyone at a dinner party, you don't want the first person to consume the poison to face plant in the cheesecake. No one else would touch it. This could also explain why the System's narrative was obsessed with multi-stage vaccinations — the first may have been harmless to lull people into a false sense of trust, and it also gives more nuanced control over the timing of events.
But, the author of the Cassandra Hypothesis omitted a crucial detail. It's a detail that will have a massive bearing on the entire future of humanity and goes a long way to explaining the timing of everything we are living through. It has to do with the Earth's magnetosphere.
The great switch-off
If it wasn't for our planet's magnetosphere, its invisible magnetic shield that protects us from space weather, you wouldn't be reading this. In fact, you wouldn't be using any electrical equipment, you likely wouldn't have running water, your car wouldn't work, and you wouldn't hear any planes in the sky. You see, while our own star, the Sun, is critical for all life on the planet, it also has the power to send us back to the Stone Age in the space of a few hours.
Our vast, complicated electrical world is horribly vulnerable to geomagnetic storms. Outbursts from the Sun can cause induced currents in our atmosphere and the planet itself, which can easily short out and melt electrical components. The only reason all our tech can function is that we have a shield, the magnetosphere. But, this is rapidly weakening. We know it has been weakening since a massive solar storm in 1859, known as the Carrington Event (named after a British amateur astronomer who saw the culprit solar flare while sketching sunspots).
Luckily, in 1859, our civilization's electrical grid was limited to a nascent telegraph system. Still, copper lines and equipment melted, some offices burnt down, and there were reports of some telegraph operators being able to send messages while their equipment was unplugged from the power sources. Outside, people could read newspapers at midnight as far south as Geneva, Switzerland, thanks to incredible auroras in the sky. By most accounts, it was a quite beautiful thing to see.
But, if another Carrington Event happened now, it would be a different story. Electrical equipment would be destroyed globally. Large regions, and possibly the entire planet, would lose electricity. Transformers and power lines would be destroyed. Microprocessors would be melted, rendering all our high-tech equipment, from computers and smartphones to TVs and cars, useless. The internet would be no more, data centers would be destroyed, planes would fall from the sky, ships would become uncontrollable, and global supply chains, industry, and agriculture would instantly cease to function. Needless to say, banks, hospitals, police and fire services, and pretty much anything else, would also collapse.
And, due to the chaos, it would be impossible to fix things at any scale. How would you make replacement components, and even if you could make them, how could you get them to where they were needed? Disconnected components stored in properly shielded places could conceivably be used to get things back up and running in some areas — but they would be very, very limited and localized (think back to the DUMBs). The vast majority of the planet would very quickly descend into anarchy, with people fighting over the existing food and water supplies. Clearly, these wouldn't last long, and people would soon become desperate and brutal. Within weeks, our world would become unrecognizable.
Wandering poles
So, what does this have to do with current events? Well, ever since the Carrington Event, we know our magnetosphere has been weakening. We also know that the magnetic poles (not geographical poles) are moving or 'wandering.' Now, it is not that a weakening magnetosphere causes the poles to wander per se, think of it more as moving poles are like a car's speedometer — they are a signal, a dial. The quicker the magnetosphere collapses, the quicker the poles move. Obviously, at some point, the magnetic poles pass the rubicon and launch into a 'pole flip'. This is something that has long been understood and documented by studying the magnetic signatures left in iron-rich igneous rocks. Most magnetic pole flips take the form of temporary 'excursions', with rarer full reversals. Although it's very interesting, I won't delve into the detailed geology here, as it would take far too much space.
The point is that we know that we are rapidly approaching a magnetic pole flip, and we know that our magnetosphere is rapidly collapsing as we do so. What is certain is that solar-induced geomagnetic storms that would have been no threat just a couple of decades ago are now having noticeable impacts. Even moderate solar outbursts are now becoming a threat, and this trend is only going to continue until we are thrown back into the pre-electrical world. On the other side of the pole flip event, the magnetosphere will gradually power back up, and the Earth will be a safe place for an electrically dependent civilization again. Unfortunately, that won't help us.
To be clear here, we are likely to lose the grids and our electrical civilization years, perhaps decades, before the actual geomagnetic flip. And this is the reason for what we see happening around us. If there are 8 billion people alive on the planet when the grids go down, it will quickly turn to hell. Supplies in the cities will be exhausted within days and societies will rip themselves apart fighting over the remaining resources. It really will descend into something akin to Mad Max (maybe that's why most of the cars on Mad Max are very old, even from the story's jumping-off point — old cars might still work if you can get fuel because they have fewer electrical components).
So, now do you see why they need to cull the herd? The System has long known that we are going to lose our electrical grids and unshielded tech. Those pulling the strings know that, while they needed a fully functional and populated world to keep the system going for as long as possible so that they can build their bunkers and stock them, they need to ensure most of the population is already gone before the switch off. If, for example, there were only 500 million people, distributed over the entire planet, when the lights went out, there would probably be enough supplies available for immediate needs, without people hacking each other to death. Furthermore, it might be possible for remaining authorities (no doubt hiding in their DUMBs) to reestablish control, at least locally or even regionally. Whatever the case, the prospects for a population of 500 million would be a lot brighter than those of a population of 8 billion. This, I contend, is why the herd is being culled. It also goes some way to explaining why they started the operation now. But, to completely answer that, you need to understand that the magnetic pole flip and coinciding collapse of our magnetosphere, are just components of a much grander event.
And now, the main event, behold the micronova
At this point, if you're going to have any chance of comprehending what is coming, I suggest you make yourself comfortable, grab a coffee, and head on over to the Suspicious0bservers YouTube channel. Start off with this video. This explains the basics of the great cyclical disaster much better than I ever could.
But, in a nutshell, there is a great magnetic wave that emanates from the center of our galaxy (and probably every other galaxy). It spreads outwards through space, like ripples on a pond. Douglas Vogt, of the Diehold Foundation, describes this as a sort of timing wave — similar to that used in our own computers.
As this wave interacts with stars and planets it has tremendous, but clockwork-like, effects. One of these involves transporting a vast amount of cosmic dust, like an enormous static duster. This dust gradually builds up on stars, including our Sun, causing it to turn into something akin to a pressure cooker. Eventually, triggered by a change in charge from the passing current sheet, the Sun will blow off those accumulations in a small nova-like event, known as a micronova. This event will be bad news for any nearby planets, including Earth. The part of Earth facing the Sun at the time will be subject to the flash, while the remnants of the dust shell, will impact hours later, peppering the planet with impactors.
If this wasn't bad enough, the same electrical changes triggering the micronova itself will cause the Earth's crust to briefly slide at the low-velocity zone. This is the mechanism that eluded Einstein when he pondered how the crust could be displaced so dramatically, but that Chan Thomas described. Anyway, like I said, this entire process is extremely complicated, and requires a lot of research to fully appreciate — so I really do recommend taking the time to watch all of the playlists at Suspicious0bservers.
Both the solar micronova and the Earth's magnetic pole flip/excursion are ultimately part of this grand galactic symphony — as are the changes we're observing on other planets and stars. The score is vast in scale, but essentially clockwork in nature. Only by understanding that both these huge events are components part of this greater epochal catastrophe, and realizing that our current civilization is staring down the barrel of a galactic gun, will recent history make any kind of coherent sense.
As overwhelming as the realization of the events about to unfold can be, we should all take comfort in the fact that we are all descendants of survivors of many previous catastrophes. And, perhaps, like me, you'll start to look at the symbols and diagrams carved into the stone of the countless megalithic architecture around the world in a different light.
Our ancestors tried to warn us…
